Bager1968They’d be useful… that alone disqualifies them in the MOD’s eyes.
Bager1968You will go to hell for that one!!!!!
good one!:DRgds Cking
They’ll likely do a bit of ear-tweaking themselves.
PIC (Pilot In Command) Chesley B. “Sully” Sullenberger, III (58) is 29-year pilot with the airline (40+ years total flying experience), former USAF F-4 Phantom pilot, licensed glider pilot, CEO of a Safety-management/training company, consultant on crash investigations with the National Transportation Safety Board, former Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) safety chairman. 19,663 flight hours.
Flight Officer Jeffrey B. Skiles (49) is a 23-year pilot with the airline (34 years total flying experience). 15,643 flight hours.
The 3 Flight Attendants are Sheila Dail (57) with 28 years service; Doreen Welsh (58) with 30 years service and Donna Dent (51) with 26 years service.
Bager1968From this thread:http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=68457 post #5
I-153 vs. I-153 and Lagg-3 vs. Lagg-3 during Continuation War. Finns won, always.
(Soviets vs Finland 25 June 1941 – 19 September 1944)
Bager1968Wasn’t the last dogfight of WW2 fought between a Storch and a Grasshopper?
In Europe, maybe.
Have you forgotten the hundreds of combats that took place in the remaining 3+ months of very deadly fighting on the other side of the world from your narrow view?
Edit… I’ve GOT to pay more attention to post-dates (on zombie threads, especially).
Bager1968Rumors from persons involved (peripherally) with the A400M program now say it looks like an IOC of 2015 if nothing else goes wrong.
Bager1968And some of the Pirates get to meet “Davey Jones”.
Somali pirates drown with ransom after freeing Saudi supertanker
Five Somali pirates who released a Saudi supertanker have drowned with their share of a reported £2 million ransom after their escape boat capsized.
Residents and pirates in the Somali port of Haradhere told the Associated Press that the boat, which was carrying eight men, overturned in a storm after dozens of pirates left the Sirius Star following a two-month standoff in the Gulf of Aden.
Three of the eight pirates managed to swim to shore but five were believed to have drowned.
Haradhere, which has been used by pirates to launch their attacks on international vessels off east Africa, is a Somali coastal town close to where the Saudi supertanker ship was anchored.
Local sources said that the ransom payment held by the eight pirates on their get away boat had been lost at sea.
Dozens of pirates were involved in the Nov 15 hijacking of the Sirius Star, which had a £60 million cargo of crude oil. The estimated £2 million paid to release it on behalf of the ship’s owners was split between many members of the gang.
The ransom was delivered on Friday by airdrop, parachuted close to the ship in a waterproof case for the pirates to collect. They were then allowed to make their escape.
Bager1968EADS admits “A400M programme in disarray”
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0…07658.html?nclick_check=1
Mixed in with stuff about layoffs at Boeing is the following:
By Kevin Done and Sylvia Pfeifer in London
Published: January 10 2009 02:00 | Last updated: January 10 2009 02:00
Airbus, and its parent EADS, admitted last night its A400M military transport aircraft programme was in disarray and it had approached European governments to try to renegotiate aspects of the €20bn programme.
…
EADS said last night it wanted to review the timing and technical characteristics of the A400M, as it admitted it was still unable to set a date for its first flight.EADS subsidiary, Airbus Military, said it proposed resuming production of the aircraft only once it had reached “adequate maturity” based on flight test results. The company admitted that it was still working with the consortium of engine manufacturers to firm up a date for the first flight. Delivery of the aircraft would then take place around three years after the first flight.
EADS said it would only be able to “reliably determine all financial implications once a committed industrial plan, including the availability of systems, is fully stabilised” and once it knew the position of its launch customers to its proposal.
The news throws into disarray the proposed delivery schedule of the €20bn programme, Europe’s largest military project, which has run into serious problems with growing delays and rising losses. The French air force had originally been due to receive the first delivery in October 2009.
EADS was forced in November last year to take an additional €341m charge for the latest delays. It warned at the time it was still unable to produce a reliable delivery schedule and said it would face further charges for the loss-making, fixed-price contract.
It took an initial €1.37bn charge a year ago. EADS has blamed the delays on problems with the propulsion system for the aircraft, specifically the engine control software.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009
This news was preceded by:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0…dd-ba02-000077b07658.html
EADS to merge military transport into Airbus
By Kevin Done andSylvia Pfeifer in London
Published: December 16 2008 22:21 | Last updated: December 16 2008 22:21
EADS is reorganising its military transport aircraft operations by integrating the Spain-based business into Airbus, its commercial aircraft division.
The restructuring is one of the most important industrial moves to rationalise EADS since the Franco-German group overcame its complex corporate governance challenges last year and abandoned the complicated system of having joint French and German chairmen and chief executives.
The group is also planning closer co-ordination of its space and defence and security divisions under the leadership of François Auque, chief executive of the EADS Astrium space business. The separate military transport aircraft division was established from the outset when EADS was created in 2000 through a merger of large parts of the French, German and Spanish aerospace and defence industries.
The division was based in Spain partly to satisfy national sensibilities among the three shareholder nations, where French and German interests have dominated and have often been in conflict. The Spanish state still holds a 5.5 per cent stake in EADS.The separate organisations led to complicated reporting structures and responsibilities, however, as the EADS group worked to develop military derivatives of Airbus commercial aircraft and in particular to develop the A400M military transport aircraft.
The A400M programme has run into serious problems with growing delays and rising losses and the reorganisation announced yesterday has been made more urgent by the need to regain control of the project.
EADS was forced last month to take an additional €341m ($471m) charge for the latest delays. It warned it was still unable to produce a reliable delivery schedule and said it would face further charges for the loss-making, fixed price contract. It took an initial €1.37bn charge a year ago.
EADS has blamed the delays on problems with the propulsion system for the aircraft, specifically the engine control software. First delivery to the French air force was originally scheduled for October 2009 and the first flight was due to have taken place in the summer of this year, but there is currently no date for the start of the flight test programme.
Until yesterday overall programme responsibility for the A400M lay with the military transport aircraft division in Spain along with responsibility for production including the final assembly plant in Seville. Development of the aircraft has been undertaken by Airbus in Toulouse. As a result of yesterday’s shake-up, the Spain-based division will be integrated into Airbus under the name of Airbus Military.
Carlos Suarez, hitherto head of the division, will remain a member of the EADS executive committee and become a member of the Airbus executive committee reporting to Tom Enders, Airbus chief executive. The reorganisation strengthens the position of Mr Enders at the head of Airbus and underlines his claim to become the next chief executive of EADS.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008
Bager1968From a pilot’s viewpoint, I would prefer that the added drag from the TRD be at the center of thrust… not as far to one side as possible.
Something about assymetric drag… I know the computer will automatically compensate, but it will, absolutely, not only create more drag in the process, but also create a situation where the aircraft will turn more quickly, and to a greater turn rate/turn angle when turning into the TRD side than away from it.
That could be a problem in some situations.
Bager1968http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/f8_19.html
The Crusader III was to be be armed with three Sparrow missiles mounted semi-recessed inside slots cut into the lower fuselage. There was one slot on each side of the lower fuselage (located just ahead of the main landing gear doors), and one slot was cut into the port side of the belly. The nosewheel was slightly offset to starboard to give clearance to the belly-mounted Sparrow. Had the Crusader III ever reached production, a pair of shorter-range AIM-9 Sidewinder would also have beem mounted on pylons on each side of the fuselage, in much the same fashion as was installed on later versions of the F-8.
In a concession to tradition, the usual quartet of 20-mm cannon was to be fitted, even though the conventional wisdom of the time was that the air-to-air missile would make kills possible at such long ranges that cannon armament would never be used in combat. No cannon armament was actually ever installed.
Bager1968http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/f8_19.html
The Crusader III was to be be armed with three Sparrow missiles mounted semi-recessed inside slots cut into the lower fuselage. There was one slot on each side of the lower fuselage (located just ahead of the main landing gear doors), and one slot was cut into the port side of the belly. The nosewheel was slightly offset to starboard to give clearance to the belly-mounted Sparrow. Had the Crusader III ever reached production, a pair of shorter-range AIM-9 Sidewinder would also have beem mounted on pylons on each side of the fuselage, in much the same fashion as was installed on later versions of the F-8.
In a concession to tradition, the usual quartet of 20-mm cannon was to be fitted, even though the conventional wisdom of the time was that the air-to-air missile would make kills possible at such long ranges that cannon armament would never be used in combat. No cannon armament was actually ever installed.
Bager1968The radar of the F4H/F8U-3 era required constant attention up until missile impact (or miss).
The F-15’s radar was basically a “hands-off” system, requiring the pilot to only select his specific target and pull the weapons trigger on his hand-grip.
The radar installed in the Italian F-104S benefited from the same 2-generational improvement in avionics tech as did the F-15 radar.
One generation from the Raytheon Aero 11B fire control system & AN/APQ-150 radar system (of both F4H-1F [F-4A] & F8U-3) to the AN/AWG-10 fire control system & AN/APG-59 pulse-Doppler radar of the F-4J (Westinghouse AN/APQ-120 X-band radar for F-4E)… and another to the Hughes AN/APG-63 X-band (8-12 GHz) coherent pulsed-Doppler radar set of the F-15A.
The NASARR R-21G/H radar of the F-104S is similar to the APG-63 in capability… it has moving-target indication and tracking capability that acts in association with with a medium-range radar-guided missile fit. The R21G/H also has contour/ground mapping and terrain avoidance modes, so that it can also act as a fighter-bomber.
Bager1968The radar of the F4H/F8U-3 era required constant attention up until missile impact (or miss).
The F-15’s radar was basically a “hands-off” system, requiring the pilot to only select his specific target and pull the weapons trigger on his hand-grip.
The radar installed in the Italian F-104S benefited from the same 2-generational improvement in avionics tech as did the F-15 radar.
One generation from the Raytheon Aero 11B fire control system & AN/APQ-150 radar system (of both F4H-1F [F-4A] & F8U-3) to the AN/AWG-10 fire control system & AN/APG-59 pulse-Doppler radar of the F-4J (Westinghouse AN/APQ-120 X-band radar for F-4E)… and another to the Hughes AN/APG-63 X-band (8-12 GHz) coherent pulsed-Doppler radar set of the F-15A.
The NASARR R-21G/H radar of the F-104S is similar to the APG-63 in capability… it has moving-target indication and tracking capability that acts in association with with a medium-range radar-guided missile fit. The R21G/H also has contour/ground mapping and terrain avoidance modes, so that it can also act as a fighter-bomber.
Bager1968And where did the fuselage and wings “just materialize from” then? What museum “gave them up and now regret it”… since you feel the restorers of this aircraft couldn’t have done the work themselves?
There is a clear explanation of the work done from one who was there the whole time in that WIX thread… yet some here insist on calling those who were involved, and those who have spoken to others who were involved liars!
XM692, did you read Mark12s comment above yours? Or is he lying too?
If you have proof they are lying, then give it… otherwise shut up!
Bager1968McDonnell Douglas delivered that DC-9-30 to Playboy Enterprises back in November of 1969.
Bager1968Ah… yes… a purely “civilian” ship… won’t violate WNT, nothing to see, move along… move along.
😉
And in wartime it would simply be another merchant ship, sailing with convoys of other merchant ships…actually a decent idea for an early MAC/CVE.
And with all those “lifeboats” and “passengers” it would make a decent prototype “commando carrier”, too!
Too bad that pesky WNT would not accept it as a “non-warship”… at least the other signatories wouldn’t accept it as such.
Sign In
